IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/areint/256383.html

Sustainable use of land in danger of wind erosion in Ukraine: stakeholder engagement

Author

Listed:
  • Anatoliy, Kucher
  • Iryna, Kazakova
  • Lesya, Kucher
  • Antonia, Schraml
  • Hekuran, Koka
  • Warren, Priest5

Abstract

In the modern world overcoming the problems of soil erosion and the transition to the sustainable use of land, especially land involved in agricultural production, is impossible without the broad involvement of all interested and stakeholding parties in solving these problems. Dialogue with stakeholders is a key element of effective management at individual farm and state levels. Currently in Ukraine, there is considerable scope and need for significant improvements in this area as only a small number of companies (industrial, commercial) involved in the agricultural sector have developed stakeholder engagement tools, and only one is actively involved in dialogue with stakeholders. This paper presents research focusing on the village of Pishcha in Volyn region, Ukraine. It examines the theoretical and methodological aspects of: identifying key stakeholders, determining their interests (explicit and implicit) and the possible impact of these on the project; project preparation and implementation; the identification of apparent or potential conflicts between the interests of different stakeholders, and the possibility of reconciling these interests and establishing constructive relationships between them; the forms of participation appropriate to each of the stakeholders at each stage of the project cycle; and, the possibilities for the monitoring and evaluation processes, especially participatory methods that look to involve interested parties. The paper also sets out a provisional budget (facilitation needed, personnel and staffing required) for and discusses the feasibility of the implementation of the engagement process of stakeholders for the promotion and roll out of promising options for the sustainable use of land in danger of wind erosion in Ukraine.

Suggested Citation

  • Anatoliy, Kucher & Iryna, Kazakova & Lesya, Kucher & Antonia, Schraml & Hekuran, Koka & Warren, Priest5, . "Sustainable use of land in danger of wind erosion in Ukraine: stakeholder engagement," Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, vol. 1(2).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:areint:256383
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.256383
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/256383/files/1Kucher_ARE_2015_Vol%201_No%202.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.256383?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Blackstock, K.L. & Kelly, G.J. & Horsey, B.L., 2007. "Developing and applying a framework to evaluate participatory research for sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 726-742, February.
    2. Anatoliy, Kucher & Iryna, Kazakova & Lesya, Kucher & Halina, Kozak & Antonia, Schraml & Hekuran, Koka & Warren, Priest, . "Economics of soil degradation and sustainable use of land in danger of wind erosion," Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, vol. 1(01).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Liang Pei & Chunhui Wang & Liying Sun & Lili Wang, 2022. "Temporal and Spatial Variation (2001–2020) Characteristics of Wind Speed in the Water Erosion Area of the Typical Black Soil Region, Northeast China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-17, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vanda Carreira & João Reis Machado & Lia Vasconcelos, 2016. "Engaging Citizen Participation—A Result of Trusting Governmental Institutions and Politicians in the Portuguese Democracy," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 5(3), pages 1-11, August.
    2. Natalie A Jones & Pascal Perez & Thomas G Measham & Gail J Kelly & Patrick D’Aquino & Katherine Daniell & Anne Dray & Nils Ferrand, 2008. "Evaluating Participatory Modeling: Developing a Framework for Cross-case Analysis," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2008-11, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.
    3. Kraaijvanger, Richard & Veldkamp, Tom & Almekinders, Conny, 2016. "Considering change: Evaluating four years of participatory experimentation with farmers in Tigray (Ethiopia) highlighting both functional and human–social aspects," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 38-50.
    4. M. Manjula & R. Rengalakshmi, 2021. "Making Research Collaborations: Learning from Processes of Transdisciplinary Engagement in Agricultural Research," Review of Development and Change, , vol. 26(1), pages 25-39, June.
    5. Xing, Yangang & Horner, R. Malcolm W. & El-Haram, Mohamed A. & Bebbington, Jan, 2009. "A framework model for assessing sustainability impacts of urban development," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 209-224.
    6. Rossing, Walter A.H. & Albicette, Maria Marta & Aguerre, Veronica & Leoni, Carolina & Ruggia, Andrea & Dogliotti, Santiago, 2021. "Crafting actionable knowledge on ecological intensification: Lessons from co-innovation approaches in Uruguay and Europe," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    7. Rawlins, Maurice A. & Westby, Leon, 2013. "Community participation in payment for ecosystem services design and implementation: An example from Trinidad," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 117-121.
    8. Patrizia Grifoni & Tiziana Guzzo & Fernando Ferri, 2014. "Environmental Sustainability and Participatory Approaches: the Case of Italy," Journal of Sustainable Development, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 7(3), pages 1-1, April.
    9. Subhajyoti Samaddar & Norio Okada & Junho Choi & Hirokazu Tatano, 2017. "What constitutes successful participatory disaster risk management? Insights from post-earthquake reconstruction work in rural Gujarat, India," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 85(1), pages 111-138, January.
    10. Pasquale Marcello Falcone & Sara González García & Enrica Imbert & Lucía Lijó & María Teresa Moreira & Almona Tani & Valentina Elena Tartiu & Piergiuseppe Morone, 2019. "Transitioning towards the bio‐economy: Assessing the social dimension through a stakeholder lens," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(5), pages 1135-1153, September.
    11. Marianne Hubeau & Fleur Marchand & Guido Van Huylenbroeck, 2017. "Sustainability Experiments in the Agri-Food System: Uncovering the Factors of New Governance and Collaboration Success," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-23, June.
    12. Bertrand Méda & Léonie Dusart & Juliette Protino & Philippe Lescoat & Cécile Berri & Pascale Magdelaine & Isabelle Bouvarel, 2021. "OVALI, Sustainability for Poultry ® : A Method Co-Designed by Stakeholders to Assess the Sustainability of Chicken Supply Chains in Their Territories," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-19, January.
    13. Honghao Zhang & Yong Peng & Guangdong Tian & Danqi Wang & Pengpeng Xie, 2017. "Green material selection for sustainability: A hybrid MCDM approach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(5), pages 1-26, May.
    14. Elena Bakhanova & Jaime A. Garcia & William L. Raffe & Alexey Voinov, 2023. "Gamification Framework for Participatory Modeling: A Proposal," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 32(5), pages 1167-1182, October.
    15. Springett, Jane & Wright, Michael T. & Roche, Brenda, 2011. "Developing quality criteria for Participatory Health Research: An agenda for action," Discussion Papers, Research Group Public Health SP I 2011-302, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    16. Simone Gingrich & Martin Schmid & Thomas Dirnböck & Iwona Dullinger & Rita Garstenauer & Veronika Gaube & Helmut Haberl & Martin Kainz & Daniel Kreiner & Renate Mayer & Michael Mirtl & Oliver Sass & T, 2016. "Long-Term Socio-Ecological Research in Practice: Lessons from Inter- and Transdisciplinary Research in the Austrian Eisenwurzen," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-14, August.
    17. Hoffmann, Sabine & Pohl, Christian & Hering, Janet G., 2017. "Exploring transdisciplinary integration within a large research program: Empirical lessons from four thematic synthesis processes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 678-692.
    18. Livia Fritz & Ulli Vilsmaier & Garance Clément & Laurie Daffe & Anna Pagani & Melissa Pang & Daniel Gatica-Perez & Vincent Kaufmann & Marie Santiago Delefosse & Claudia R. Binder, 2022. "Explore, engage, empower: methodological insights into a transformative mixed methods study tackling the COVID-19 lockdown," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13, December.
    19. Eefje Cuppen, 2012. "Diversity and constructive conflict in stakeholder dialogue: considerations for design and methods," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 45(1), pages 23-46, March.
    20. Katja Brundiers & Arnim Wiek, 2013. "Do We Teach What We Preach? An International Comparison of Problem- and Project-Based Learning Courses in Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-22, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:areint:256383. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://are-journal.com/are .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.